Wednesday, March 20, 2019

At last! Scott Morrison is set to slash Australia's immigration intake by 30,000 people a year

Still too high

Prime Minister Scott Morrison is preparing to slash Australia's immigration intake. A cap of 160,000 people per year is expected to be introduced, setting an official limit for the first time and dropping the average annual intake from 190,000.

The government's Expenditure Review Committee has approved the Coalition's broader population policies, The Australian reported.

Mr Morrison has also defended reviving the population debate so soon after the Christchurch terror attacks, where the alleged gunman is accused of harbouring hate against Muslim immigrants.  

The prime minister said discussions about population should not be 'hijacked' by other debates on race or tolerance.  

Mr Morrison said he did not agree with people calling for less migration because of fears about immigrants causing terrorist attacks. 'This debate about population growth and migration has nothing to do with those other issues that have been the subject of recent focus.'

The prime minister said discussions about population should not be 'hijacked' by other debates on race or tolerance. 'We've seen what happens when these important practical debates are hijacked by these other extremist views, which occur from both the right and from the left,' he said.

'I'm determined to not see the serious population growth management issues taken off course, to be hijacked by those who want to push other agendas. 'I have no purchase in those agendas, I have no truck with those agendas, and I denounce them absolutely.'  

'The worst example being the despicable appropriation of concerns about immigration as a justification for a terrorist atrocity,' he told the Sydney Morning Herald.

However, he also said calling for limits on immigration levels did not make someone a racist. 'Such views have rightly been denounced. But equally, so too must the imputation that the motivation for supporting moderated immigration levels is racial hatred,' he said. 

Mr Morrison said debate about the number of migrants moving to Australia each year was not related to the value of immigration to the country.

'Just because Australians are frustrated about traffic jams and population pressures encroaching on their quality of life, especially in this city, does not mean they are anti-migrant or racist,' he said.

A regional settlement policy - which will require people in the general skilled migrant scheme to live in cities other than Sydney and Melbourne for at least five years - has also been approved by cabinet.  

Labor frontbencher Mark Butler said the policy appeared to be the status quo. 'If Scott Morrison has some detail he wants to show to us or the Australian community, obviously we'd be willing to look at it,' he told ABC Radio National.

The government has also been hinting at spreading migrants across the states and territories to ease pressure on infrastructure, without outlining any concrete details about how this would work.

Its policies are expected to centre on forcing skilled migrants to live for at least five years in cities other than Sydney or Melbourne, and enticing university students into regional towns.


Fears Labor's plan to slash carbon emissions could cost 336,000 jobs and cause an 8 per cent plunge in wages

Labor's plan to halve carbon emissions within the next decade could cost 336,000 jobs and cause an eight per cent plunge in lost wages by 2030.

BAEconomics has modelled the climate change policies of both major parties and the effects they could have on the broader economy.

The Canberra-based economics consultancy predicts policies aimed at cutting emissions will result in higher electricity prices, and increased production costs in the mining, transport and manufacturing sectors.

The group's managing director Brian Fisher, who has been an economist since 1976, said tackling climate change involved hip-pocket pain and slower economic growth.

'The reason I've done this work was because a lot of people were running around, particularly from universities, saying, "We can achieve all of these reductions in emissions at no cost to the economy",' he told Daily Mail Australia on Tuesday.

'It's just very frustrating for an economist to hear that sort of thing because it's frankly very dishonest.'

BAEconomics analysed Labor's plan to slash carbon emissions by 45 per cent by 2030 and see 50 per cent of Australia's energy come from renewable sources by that time.

It concluded that under Labor, average full-time salaries in 2030 would stand at $97,000 instead of $106,000.

Full-time workers would be earning more than eight per cent less than they otherwise would have under Labor's climate change policies.

By comparison, the Coalition's less ambitious plans to reduce the effects of global warming would see average wages hit $104,000 by 2030, which would be two per cent less than they would otherwise have been.

The policies of the Liberal and National parties, to reduce carbon emission by 28 per cent by 2030, would also see 78,000 jobs lost during the next decade. That is four times less than the projected 336,000 jobs lost by 2030 under Labor's climate change policies.

'There's always some cost associated with this sort of transformation,' Dr Fisher said. 'As a consequence of that, you grow more slowly than you otherwise would have done and therefore you generate less jobs and your wage rates are going to grow more slowly.'


Calls to sack Kochie over fiery debate with Pauline Hanson intensify

Viewers have fired up even further over Sunrise host David Koch going hard on Pauline Hanson, noting the popular morning program has given the controversial politician a platform for years.

Backlash has increased since Monday morning’s heated interview when the One Nation leader was labelled “cowardly” after telling the program she would abstain from a vote to censure Senator Fraser Anning over his offensive comments about the Christchurch mosque shootings.

Senator Hanson rejected the accusation that her comments about Muslims in Australia “empowered” white supremacists like the one accused of carrying out Friday’s terror attack in New Zealand.

Koch told Ms Hanson that Brenton Tarrant’s manifesto, which the 28-year-old sent to New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern before the attack, “reads like One Nation immigration and Muslim policy”.

But viewers have come out swinging against Sunrise for Koch’s harsh interview style, labelling him a “bully” and calling for him to be sacked.

Even those who aren’t supporters of Senator Hanson or One Nation have criticised Sunrise for trying to take a “moral high ground” when the program has regularly hosted her.

She has been a regular guest on the show for years, including being a prominent presence on the show in the lead-up to the 2016 federal election.

Sunrise producer Michael Pell confirmed to at the time that Senator Hanson was paid for her appearances.

Commentators on Twitter have pointed out the hypocrisy of Sunrise lashing Senator Hanson when they’ve given her a paid platform for years. “Why on earth do you give her a platform so out of proportion with her support and have done so for years,” one man on Twitter said.

“It is now time for everyone including Ch 7 to take responsibility for their actions.”

Ex-senator Andrew Bartlett said: “Do you feel complicit, given that your program and network have given her a platform for so long — and even paid her to do so?” understands Seven will continue to host Senator Hanson as a regular guest.

A petition calling for Koch’s sacking gained more than 50,000 signatures in a day.

Senator Hanson yesterday took to Facebook to respond to her supporters saying she felt “ambushed” and wanted to explain herself properly and answer the questions posed.

“I challenge, has David Koch or Derryn Hinch actually read my immigration policy?,” she said. “Do they really understand? I don’t think they do. They’re quick to criticise me.

“People in our society are in fear of the ever-changing society we now live in.”

Senator Hanson said she did not condone the terrorist attack in any shape or form. She said her comments were based on finding out the reasons behind “these terrorist attacks”, not shutting down debate.

“That’s the whole crux of the problem that we have here in Australia — debate it, talk about it, have a voice. You have a right to have a voice.”

Ms Hanson again said the censure motion meant absolutely nothing, only voters could have Mr Anning removed from parliament.

“Why I’m not going to support the censure motion is, as Voltaire said, ‘I may not agree with what you say but I defend your right to say it’ … because I’m sick of these politicians pushing their own political agenda, beating their owns chests, for what, so they look good? No.”


The Liberal Party candidate in the prized seat of Curtin spurns climate warming consensus

Celia Hammond, has declared her ­belief that humanity’s contribution to global warming has ­likely been “very minimal”.

Ms Hammond, who was preselected last week to contest the safe seat, acknowledged that ­climate change was a major concern among voters in Curtin, but said the issue must be addressed in ways that did not harm the economy.

She rejected scientific opinion that the burning of fossil fuels was the main factor behind global warming.

“I believe man has contributed in some way to climate change — the exact extent is probably very minimal,” she said.

When asked whether her ­belief was backed by scientific ­evidence, she said: “I don’t believe it goes against the science. There is a lot of science and a lot of contradictory science.

“But I am always open to evidence-based approaches and I’m always happy to actually, if need be, change course, to change ­direction.”

The consensus within the scientific community is that human activity is the primary cause of global warming and that continuing greenhouse gas emissions will increase the severity of climate change.

Ms Hammond, 50, rejected suggestions by some of her political opponents that she is too ­socially conservative to represent Curtin, which had the strongest vote in Western Australia in favour of same-sex marriage.

“I’m not ultraconservative,” she said. “There are people who are less conservative than me and there are people who are more conservative than me.”

She refused to reveal how she voted in the same-sex marriage survey in 2017. “I voted as a private citizen, the law has since been changed and I’ve been to a same-sex wedding of people that I love very much,” she said. “I’ve got my own personal values and I don’t impose them on anybody.”

Ms Hammond’s main rival in Curtin, independent Louise Stewart, claimed last week that the ­Liberal Party’s choice of a “conservative” candidate was a huge boost for her campaign.

Ms Hammond is widely respected for her success in running the University of Notre Dame for more than a decade and she impressed Liberal preselection delegates, who gave her 62 per cent of the first-preference votes cast.

It emerged before the preselection ballot that Ms Hammond had spoken out against “militant feminism”, casual sex and contraception. She stood by the comments yesterday.

“The reason I don’t call myself a feminist is that there is within the feminist movement now a very large militant feminist voice which is essentially saying unless you believe X, Y, Z you’re not pro-women,” she said.

“And the whole thing for me about feminism is that women should be able to make up their own minds and live their own lives and not be told.”

Ms Hammond revealed she would work closely with longstanding Curtin MP Julie Bishop in the lead-up to the federal election.  “Julie has given her full support,” she said.

“I met with Julie before I put my application in. She wished me well, she was delighted there was a field of people running, and she rang me within moments of it being announced that I’d been preselected to congratulate me to say we’d be working together.”


 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here

1 comment:

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.